Key Documents

City council, water board will return to negotiations

Spartanburg Water General Manager Sue Schneider addresses a group of residents during a public forum at the Herald-Journal on Thursday night. The forum, which was held to discuss a dispute between City Council and the Commission of Public Works, was sponsored by the Herald-Journal and WSPA.

Published: Thursday, March 28, 2013 at 10:14 p.m.

Last Modified: Monday, April 1, 2013 at 12:48 p.m.

Spartanburg City Council and members of the Commission of Public Works agreed to return to the negotiating table after a 90-minute public forum Thursday night.

About 70 residents attended the forum, which was held at the Herald-Journal's offices and sponsored by the newspaper and WSPA. The television station reported that more than 250 people viewed the public discussion through a live stream on its website.

At times, exchanges between residents and commissioners became heated, as did discussions between city and water officials. City Council and Public Works commissioners have been at odds for the past 10 months about a $1.4 million transfer of money from the water system, which is owned by city residents, to the city's general fund.

In May, the commission notified the city that it would no longer make the transfer. City Manager Ed Memmott said without the funds, the city would have to significantly reduce services and raise taxes.

During the forum, city resident Marshall Irby said the water system should “do what is in the best interest of its constituents” and absorb the $1.4 million in its budget.

As part of the forum, Spartanburg Water General Manager Sue Schneider and Commissioner John Montgomery made a presentation about the water system's short-term and long-term financial challenges, saying the utility has been forced to raise water rates for five consecutive years and no longer has available funds to give the city.

Water commissioners said if a city resident pays $100 for water, then a customer living in the county pays $175 for the same amount of water.

Longtime Water Commissioner Linda Bilanchone said the decision to cut the transfer payment didn't come quickly. Bilanchone said in years past, the payment was a percentage of the water system's revenues until the payment reached $1.5 million and commissioners negotiated the flat $1.4 million figure five years ago.

“What happened was the payment got higher and higher and higher, and when it hit $1.5 million, we said this has to start stepping down,” Bilanchone said. In its proposal to City Council, the CPW offered $100,000 in free water, $400,000 to the general fund (which would step down by $100,000 annually), and $500,000 in economic development grants, which the commission would approve. No council member would agree to that offer, a proposal that Mayor Junie White called ridiculous.

Instead, city management proposed the commission return to transferring a percentage of its revenues to the city, beginning at 4 percent for the fiscal years 2014-2016, and then stepping that percentage down to 3 percent from fiscal year 2026 onward — or at least until the CPW has no outstanding debt authorized by the city. A maximum annual payment would have been set for each phase of the agreement, reaching $1.65 million in fiscal years 2023-2025. From 2026 on, there would have been no cap on the annual payment.

Montgomery said repeatedly Thursday that City Council had not been willing to negotiate, which prompted a rebuff from White and Councilman Jerome Rice. “You know that is not true, John, we have negotiated at meetings three different times and individuals have talked several other times,” White said. “Tell the truth, it's simply not true.”

Most of those who asked questions during the forum inquired about the water system's financial situation, and said commissioners should look at other places in the budget to cut.

“I implore you to sit down at the table and talk,” said city resident Melissa Walker.

City resident George Louden said the commission should have presented its owners — city residents — with other options before cutting the payment.

Montgomery responded, “This is the process. This is what we call democracy, and we've called to talk to them about options. Our meetings are open, and we invite people to them.”

Councilman Sterling Anderson said the issue is even more pressing in light of imminent budget sessions. The city must pass a budget to take effect on July 1.

Councilwoman Cate Ryba said the forum gave people insight into the water commission, which like City Council, is also comprised of elected officials.

“This is a substantial policy change that needs public input,” Ryba said. “Anytime the city has a policy change, we have public hearings and have public comment sessions where people can come and say what they like and what they don't. I hope that we'll be able to sit down and resolve this.”

<p>Spartanburg City Council and members of the Commission of Public Works agreed to return to the negotiating table after a 90-minute public forum Thursday night.</p><p>About 70 residents attended the forum, which was held at the Herald-Journal's offices and sponsored by the newspaper and WSPA. The television station reported that more than 250 people viewed the public discussion through a live stream on its website.</p><p>At times, exchanges between residents and commissioners became heated, as did discussions between city and water officials. City Council and Public Works commissioners have been at odds for the past 10 months about a $1.4 million transfer of money from the water system, which is owned by city residents, to the city's general fund.</p><p>In May, the commission notified the city that it would no longer make the transfer. City Manager Ed Memmott said without the funds, the city would have to significantly reduce services and raise taxes.</p><p>During the forum, city resident Marshall Irby said the water system should “do what is in the best interest of its constituents” and absorb the $1.4 million in its budget.</p><p>As part of the forum, Spartanburg Water General Manager Sue Schneider and Commissioner John Montgomery made a presentation about the water system's short-term and long-term financial challenges, saying the utility has been forced to raise water rates for five consecutive years and no longer has available funds to give the city.</p><p>Water commissioners said if a city resident pays $100 for water, then a customer living in the county pays $175 for the same amount of water.</p><p>Longtime Water Commissioner Linda Bilanchone said the decision to cut the transfer payment didn't come quickly. Bilanchone said in years past, the payment was a percentage of the water system's revenues until the payment reached $1.5 million and commissioners negotiated the flat $1.4 million figure five years ago.</p><p>“What happened was the payment got higher and higher and higher, and when it hit $1.5 million, we said this has to start stepping down,” Bilanchone said. In its proposal to City Council, the CPW offered $100,000 in free water, $400,000 to the general fund (which would step down by $100,000 annually), and $500,000 in economic development grants, which the commission would approve. No council member would agree to that offer, a proposal that Mayor Junie White called ridiculous.</p><p>Instead, city management proposed the commission return to transferring a percentage of its revenues to the city, beginning at 4 percent for the fiscal years 2014-2016, and then stepping that percentage down to 3 percent from fiscal year 2026 onward — or at least until the CPW has no outstanding debt authorized by the city. A maximum annual payment would have been set for each phase of the agreement, reaching $1.65 million in fiscal years 2023-2025. From 2026 on, there would have been no cap on the annual payment.</p><p>Montgomery said repeatedly Thursday that City Council had not been willing to negotiate, which prompted a rebuff from White and Councilman Jerome Rice. “You know that is not true, John, we have negotiated at meetings three different times and individuals have talked several other times,” White said. “Tell the truth, it's simply not true.”</p><p>Most of those who asked questions during the forum inquired about the water system's financial situation, and said commissioners should look at other places in the budget to cut.</p><p>“I implore you to sit down at the table and talk,” said city resident Melissa Walker.</p><p>City resident George Louden said the commission should have presented its owners — city residents — with other options before cutting the payment.</p><p>Montgomery responded, “This is the process. This is what we call democracy, and we've called to talk to them about options. Our meetings are open, and we invite people to them.”</p><p>Councilman Sterling Anderson said the issue is even more pressing in light of imminent budget sessions. The city must pass a budget to take effect on July 1.</p><p>Councilwoman Cate Ryba said the forum gave people insight into the water commission, which like City Council, is also comprised of elected officials.</p><p>“This is a substantial policy change that needs public input,” Ryba said. “Anytime the city has a policy change, we have public hearings and have public comment sessions where people can come and say what they like and what they don't. I hope that we'll be able to sit down and resolve this.”</p>